I came across a comparison of six RAW converters this morning which I thought might be of interest. The camera used was a Canon 5D MkII and obviously Canon's DPP software is Canon specific but the results might form a reasonable starting point for researching the suitability of the converters for other manufacturer's cameras.

For me DPP also wins out, not because it's a better RAW converter but because it has corrections for my lens collection already built in.

But, laying aside my Canon bias, the free Raw Therapee software looks very interesting. Probably the biggest caveat about this test is that, for reasons stated by the reviewer, it doesn't explore the effectiveness or otherwise of high ISO noise reduction.

A very limited test bed. I can think of several excellent and well-known raw development applications missing from this test so it's pretty irrelevant I think. There isn't that much raw software about so it wouldn't be too difficult or unmanageable to test and compare them all, now that would be interesting. This one is only half done.

"Irrelevant " sounds a little harsh. So which RAW converters are you thinking of?

Bob.

All those currently available which have been omitted, including 'Bibble', SilkyPix, Olympus Studio (brand specific, I know, but so is DPP). Bibble & SilkyPix are both regular topics on the raw-capture forums so they deserve inclusion.

.Fair enough. Do you know of a review which includes those programs as well as the one in the test I linked to?

Bob.

Sadly, no. Which is even more reason why this one is disappointing because a more comprehensive and inclusive review is well overdue. The fact that I don't know of such a review does not negate my previous comments.

Hi.
First of all, thanks for the tip Bob.
For all of those eager to work and spread knowledge about... eh stuff, there´s been an update on the mentioned site.
You may now download the raw file and squeeze it through the raw converter of your personal desire and get them added to the comparison.
Follow Bob´s link. After the comparison you could read more about it.
Jan

And thanks for the tip. Being able to download the original RAW file used in the comparison will be particularly valuable for those whose converter didn't feature in the original article. I see that "Raw Converter Comparison Part 2, Dynamic Range, Tonal Values and Noise is coming soon" so we'll be able to see the other side of the equation as well.